Re: question on 2.4 scheduler, threads, and priority inversion

[Chris Friesen]

Robert Hancock wrote:

> I believe that in the old LinuxThreads implementation the manager thread 
>  is the one that handles all signals, so it may need its priority 
> increased as well. NPTL threads likely handle this much better (there is 
> no manager thread).

Some experimenting leads me to believe that both the main thread and the 
manager thread must be of higher priority than the cpu hogging thread, 
otherwise priority inversion issues occur.

I was fairly shocked that even a "kill -9" failed to work though...

Chris

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/